FSW Satellite equipment modules

From: Phillip Clark (molniya@dircon.co.uk)
Date: Sun Oct 17 2004 - 11:53:01 EDT

  • Next message: Steve Newcomb: "8539 obs oct 18"

    Having just rejoined the mailing list, I am starting off with a question.
    
    Ted Molczan sent me details of the recent discussions about the FSW-3 #2
    equipment module starting to flash, and this has opened up something which
    would be useful for a paper that I am currently working (and which I hope to
    be presenting in June next year at the British Interplanetary Society).
    
    Ted posted some comments on my behalf about my belief that the CCDs (and
    probably other equipment) in the FSW equipment modules (EM) continue to
    operate after the descent module returns to Earth.   On the FSW-0 and FSW-1
    flight the EM would be in orbit for at least a week after the descent craft
    returned: for the FSW-2 and FSW-3 missions the EM is in orbit for longer
    periods.   I would be interested if there are visual observations as to
    whether the EMs remained stable and didn't become "flashers" after the
    descent craft returned.
    
    OK, we know that the FSW-3 #2 EM is flashing, after losing attitude control,
    but what about the one from FSW-3 #1, the FSW-2 series or even FSW-1 series
    ?   I would not expect the FSW-0 series of flights (until possibly the later
    ones) to have had operating EMs left in orbit, but after that I think that
    it is possible for the later series.   Steady EMs (not flashing) would imply
    attitude control being maintained and thus the module being under ground
    control and thus continuing to operate.
    
    If anyone would like to respond either via this list or direct
    (molniya@dircon.co.uk) then any information would be fully credited in the
    planned paper.
    
    Ted did comment about some observations from Russell Eberst for the FSW-1 #5
    mission, launched in 1993.   At the time USSPACECOM was issuing two-lines
    which were very confusing because we had the equipment module was in the low
    orbit and the descent module had been boosted to an eccentric orbit after
    the satellite was mis-aligned at the time of retrofire: orbital data were
    issued for both catalogue numbers for both orbital regimes for a while,
    until USSPACECOM worked out what had happened and then sorted out their
    data.
    
    As a result, to me it is not clear whether the object which Russell observed
    as being steady on October 22, 1993 was the EM that decayed on October 28 or
    whether it was the descent module in the eccentric orbit that was steady on
    October 22 and then flashing (tumbling) on November 25.   Clarifications
    would be greatly appreciated !
    
    Many thanks in advance to anyone who can assist ........
    
    Phillip Clark
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive:  
    http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 17 2004 - 11:55:47 EDT